Sous Vide, who's doing it?

[ercchry]

Either or will add flavour, but doing it first will probably be a shorter smoke time

[schocker]

Made some chicken breast the other night with a liquid sauce instead of a rub and it worked out quite good and was very juicy. Forgot to take pics though. Need to try skin on next time though.

[Brent.ff]

$50 off ANOVA today

https://anovaculinary.com/anova-prec...100423633&ct=t

[ExtraSlow]

Hey, I keep hearing that sous vide is good for cheap cuts, but I think I'm doing something wrong. What's everyone's method for a cheapo-cut of steak? Like a top-round steak? I'm having great success with a "good" steak done rare, but on the cheap cuts, I find they stay tough if cooked at a low temp, and are gross as hell if done at higher temps.

Still experimenting, but having fun.

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by Brent.ff
$50 off ANOVA today

https://anovaculinary.com/anova-prec...23633&ct=t

Looks like $20 off, am I missing something?

Also, how well do these things work for chicken and salmon? We never cook steak or pork.

[Brent.ff]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt


Looks like $20 off, am I missing something?

Also, how well do these things work for chicken and salmon? We never cook steak or pork.

you might change your mind on Pork if you try it with this

it makes the best chicken breast you'll ever have...perfectly moist

[JordanEG6]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt


Looks like $20 off, am I missing something?

Also, how well do these things work for chicken and salmon? We never cook steak or pork.

I'v used the Anova for all of those. The results for each one are flawless. Normally, the hardest for people to cook properly are chicken breast and pork as it's a lean cut of meat that is likely to turn out a bit dry. Using the Anova, the porkchops and chicken breasts I've made were the juiciest I've ever had anywhere.

[ercchry]

Originally posted by ExtraSlow
Hey, I keep hearing that sous vide is good for cheap cuts, but I think I'm doing something wrong. What's everyone's method for a cheapo-cut of steak? Like a top-round steak? I'm having great success with a "good" steak done rare, but on the cheap cuts, I find they stay tough if cooked at a low temp, and are gross as hell if done at higher temps.

Still experimenting, but having fun.

129F for 2.5hrs... the time is the key, also having some fat and connecting tissues to break down. Top round is rather lean so it's not really going to do too much. If you're cutting up your own steaks keep in mind which way the grain is running. That's makes a huge difference in mouth feel

[Strider]

Originally posted by ExtraSlow
Hey, I keep hearing that sous vide is good for cheap cuts, but I think I'm doing something wrong. What's everyone's method for a cheapo-cut of steak? Like a top-round steak? I'm having great success with a "good" steak done rare, but on the cheap cuts, I find they stay tough if cooked at a low temp, and are gross as hell if done at higher temps.

Still experimenting, but having fun.

I find top round and bottom round aren't really suitable for anything other than maybe resoling your shoes. Fine... maybe ultra thinly sliced for hot pot / pho is okay too.

Try something like chuck (blade) steak/roast. I'd go somewhere between 24-48 hours (preferably 36-48) at 131-133°. If you're going to do 131° I'd suggest using a thermometer to ensure your circulator is calibrated.

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt
Also, how well do these things work for chicken and salmon? We never cook steak or pork.

Aside from super long cooks like 72 hour short ribs, chicken breast is probably the protein that benefits the most from sous vide - super tender and moist every time.

Salmon I'm a bit hesitant with. There's a ton of guides out there that show mouth watering rare to medium-rare results, but none of them hit pasteurization times/temps and none of them seem to address food safety. Not sure if they're using sushi grade, playing the odds, or I'm missing something.

[Brent.ff]

Other then being able to do salmon from frozen easily, there doesn't seem to be a benefit to doing it in a sous vide over pan frying, from what i've seen so far. Pork tenderloin and pork loin chops in sous vide are magic. As is chicken breast (though pre-seasoned/frozen has a bit of an odd texture)

Personally, i've kind of given up on the 'cheap meats into gold', as unless it is marbled throughout, it's never going to turn into ribeye, even if you cook it for a month. I've tried a few cuts and unless you're well into 24 hours, have had pretty hap-hazard results.

https://www.thepauperedchef.com/arti...ous-vide-steak

I have done well doing cheap cuts, cutting them thing while raw, and them making them into bulgogi or similar in the sous vide..that has worked well for me so far. Short ribs are godly if you can find them on sale

[ercchry]

Blade roast turned into thinner steaks has been awesome for me, 2.5hrs and it's great

[Mitsu3000gt]

Thanks for the info, guys.

How does it deal with two significantly different thicknesses of meat being cooked together? Or do you just have to know to take one out sooner?

[ercchry]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt
Thanks for the info, guys.

How does it deal with two significantly different thicknesses of meat being cooked together? Or do you just have to know to take one out sooner?

It's going to take a lot of time for most meats to degrade so I guess it depends on your definition of significant? Are we talking a rib eye beside a rump roast? Or a whole chicken beside a breast?

As long as you're happy with the temperature they're at then it's probably going to be fine. The times you see in the guide are just minimums and most proteins can stay in there much longer

[jwslam]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt
How does it deal with two significantly different thicknesses of meat being cooked together? Or do you just have to know to take one out sooner?

The whole point of sous vide that cooking for 3 hours is the same as 10 hrs. The entire piece(s) of meat will have the same temperature throughout; obviously that's why it takes so long as the heat needs to penetrate from the outside in, until every part of the meat matches the water temperature.

My understanding anyways. I'd assume there's chemical breakdown from the salt / other seasonings though, but 3 hours vs 4 wouldn't be a big deal.

[ExtraSlow]

Even a large cut of meat will be up to temperature within a couple of hours. Maybe an extra hour if you are cooking from frozen. Not a big deal to cook your thinner cut for an extra hour or two if that's how long your thicker/tougher cut will take. Not much harm happens. Wouldn't want to leave a cut of nice steam in the water for days or anything, but a little more time doesn't hurt. The meat doesn't get overcooked.

[Brent.ff]

Originally posted by jwslam

The whole point of sous vide that cooking for 3 hours is the same as 10 hrs. The entire piece(s) of meat will have the same temperature throughout; obviously that's why it takes so long as the heat needs to penetrate from the outside in, until every part of the meat matches the water temperature.

My understanding anyways. I'd assume there's chemical breakdown from the salt / other seasonings though, but 3 hours vs 4 wouldn't be a big deal.

the difference between 3 and 4 hours is pretty well nil, but if you went 3 to 10, there is definitely some differences, and breaking down things in a different way..

http://www.seriouseats.com/2015/06/f...teak.html#time

not sure if you've tried eggs yet but an egg at 160F at 15 minutes, is a completely different animal then 20 minutes

With that being said, you're probably not risking any noticeable difference if you're cooking two different sizes for an hour or two different

[Mitsu3000gt]

Where my question was coming from is often my GF will buy the smallest piece of chicken or salmon for herself, and then get me a larger one that is much thicker. When we cook them together in the oven, we have to take them out separately or the smaller, thinner, one will be way overcooked.

[ercchry]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt
Where my question was coming from is often my GF will buy the smallest piece of chicken or salmon for herself, and then get me a larger one that is much thicker. When we cook them together in the oven, we have to take them out separately or the smaller, thinner, one will be way overcooked.

Yeah that's no big deal, you'll love the anova if that's the case

[Mitsu3000gt]

Cool, thanks. It sounds pretty awesome, I may just have to try it.

Do you need to buy special bags? Has anyone looked into what the heat does to the ziplock bag? Any harmful chemicals or anything get leeched into the food when you heat up a cheap plastic bag for a couple hours? Inks, glues, etc. probably aren't designed to deal with lots of heat, but I really don't know. I assume it's fine because nobody seems to mention it.

[ercchry]

Ziplocks are okay for (my personal limit) about 165F... but they are pretty frustrating to get to sink, and the odd time you don't get a good seal on them it sucks

Food saver is awesome, well worth it. Can prep and freeze big Costco trips and just pop them in from frozen, and they sink without having to try and weigh them down like most ziplock cooks